[QUOTE=N FUL FX;1880409]
K-series: Thanks for that link to that site. I didn’t know such a community existed. [/QUOTE]
It’s a great site. I’ve gotten some really useful info from them.
Steve
[QUOTE=N FUL FX;1880409]
K-series: Thanks for that link to that site. I didn’t know such a community existed. [/QUOTE]
It’s a great site. I’ve gotten some really useful info from them.
Steve
My car with the following mods:
—Engine—
—Transmission—
—Intake—
—Fuel—
—Exhaust—
—Suspension—
—Wheels—
SUMMER
—Engine Management—
—Shift Linkage—
—Weight Reduction—
Gets different MPG depending on which website I use to calculate it…
http://www.eforecourt.com/calc_mpg.htm tells me I average 30.37 MPG city
http://opentoronto.com/calculators/MPG_calculator_calculate_MPG_fuel_efficiency_gas_consumption_fuel_economy.php tells me I average 25.29 MPG city
so which is it?
I usually get 430 kilometers on 40 litres of fuel. Timing is set to 18 Degrees, and currently I’m experimenting with running different octanes… so far doesn’t seem to make a difference really.
And here’s how well i take care of my car:
DUE MAINTENANCE:
oil - 317 500
PCV valve - 330 000
valve adjustment - 332 000
distributor cap and rotor - 338 000
air filter - 355 000
tranny fluid - 355 000
spark plugs - 380 000
spark plug wires - 361 000
fuel filter - 366 000
o2 sensor - 416 000
timing belt and water pump - 330 000
coolant - approximately feburary 2010 or when tested and shows badly
I have due dates for all the basic tune up stuff… Is there anything I’m missing?
And does that MPG sound about right?
From my calculation the 25 Miles Per Gallon is the more accurate number.
40 liters = 10.6 gal
430 km = 267.2 mi
267.2/10.6 = 25.2 mpg.
When I modified my car a few years back. If I remembered correctly 12 mpg. I end up lightening my car got my mpg to go from 12 to 18. I can lighten more but back then I didn’t want to take out my rear seats, lighter bucket seats, dry carbon fiber body panels(literally everything)… It was more like a waste so I just took the motor and dump the rest. Move on.
u think the gsr alloys are better for gas mileage then steelies?
I’ll be ditching my GSR’s for steelies with moon discs sometime this summer.
Steve
i’ve actually had the opposite experience. I cant get the same mileage as I did when I had my 14" steelies and hubcaps. there are other factors, however like psi and tire rolling resistance…but for now, it looks like steelies are better.
edit: ahh for a moment I thought you meant the GSR blades…but I havent been able to get the same mpg as my dad since i mounted some LS Mesh.
sorry I just woke up from a nap :dozing:
i’m not going to read through 5 pages right now. Take out all of the unnecessary shit from your car (text books, magazines, bowling shoes…) if they aren’t needed that day.
Read it’s good for you. Keep the brain working.
Obviously you were absent from school the day they taught reading. You know like read the address you’re supposed to ship people’s shit to? Oh now wait you just pocket their money and disappear.
I was just waiting for someone to say it
Please keep this argument off this thread.
Thanks,
Steve
[QUOTE=ez12a;1881093]From my calculation the 25 Miles Per Gallon is the more accurate number.
40 liters = 10.6 gal
430 km = 267.2 mi
267.2/10.6 = 25.2 mpg.[/QUOTE]
If thats the case then what else should I be checking into? Hmmm this is bothering me now…
Here is another forum with interesting information. One example is the use of boric acid as an oil additive.
I’ve gotten up to 33 mpg…thats trying hard, 30 is easy. Just take off really slow and conserve as much speed as possible (don’t slow down for corners). But i spend 3/4 of the time on the highway. I also inflated my tires to 37 psi, and my alignment is a little off (maybe helping?)
I know that if i spent a whole tank driving on the highway i could get 600 km’s (370ish miles) no problem. That’s using about 43-45 litres (11-12-13 gallons)
My car has a cone filter and cat back exhaust and 250000 km’s on it. It’s also lowered 2 1/2 inchs with no camber kits, so maybe the hard tires combined with the large camber angle leads to less surface area of tire and better fuel economy, i know its sacrificing traction.
I’ve been keeping a careful log of every gasoline purchase (along with odometer readings) since I bought my Integra in June 1999. I always fill the tank right up to the top each time I gas up, and then divide miles since last fill-up by number of gallons purchased to get an average mpg over the last tank. I just put these numbers into an excel spreadsheet to extract data.
Some numbers:
Fill ups since June 1999: 262
Lowest mpg recorded: 21.74 mpg
Highest mpg recorded: 41.64 mpg
Total average mpg: 32.23 mpg
Tanks that averaged over 40 mpg: 3
Tanks that averaged over 39 mpg: 9
Tanks that averaged over 38 mpg: 19
My car is a completely stock RS with 5-speed tranny. I drive pretty conservatively. But as the miles pile up (at 232K miles now), the average mpg’s I’m seeing are slowly dropping. However, I did get 38.07 on a half-tank from Minneapolis to Fargo in May.
Would rasing the compression help in mpg?
How bout a catch can ?
Im willing to conclude that a port job and an exhaust polish would realy help and maybe the itr header.
Well I was getting 30+ today and yesterday…I visited a friend who lives an hour and a half away and one hour was highway driving. I did 60 the whole way and I got better mileage than usual. Once I got off the highway though it was back around 27 or so like usual, but the 30 and more at times is the best my DA has seen. I hate how it seems like the gauge goes down faster once you get below 1/2 tank…
Yeah, it’s REALLY deceiving.
Steve
consider pulling your power steering system in the name of fuel economy; having bypassed my power steering pump by connecting the inlet/outlet hoses (sort of a no-cost, easy way of performing the “looped rack” mod written up in the teg tips forum) and slightly overinflated the tires, i noticed a significant difference right off the bat. HOWEVER, i think there was something wrong with my pump, as i had a bad hesitation between 2500-3000 rpm that went away when i pulled the system, so i don’t know if other vehicles will experience such a noticeable difference.
also, while the concept of unsprung weight has been discussed, consider the following: steelies weigh more than alloys. racing sdiscs are almost made from steel as opposed to plastic, and therefore add a decent amount of weight (i used to run my father in law’s hubcap store); they also cost around $100/set and that $100 can probably be invested in another fuel economy mod or tune-up procedure for greater effect. i suspect the GSR alloys, which are reasonably aerodynamic in their own right, are actually more efficient in terms of fuel efficiency, trading a slightly increased drag coefficient for a lighter weight. a good example of this concept are the wheels that went on the Honda Insight; if steelies/hubcaps were more efficient, they would have used them.
PS - gas gauges are really imprecise, and basically only good for pointing out when you need gas and when you don’t!